Honestly, why would they really care if someone save a local copy of some cat video, rant against the DMV, or a homemade version of "Ow My Balls!"?
But at the end of the day, if those 503(c).4 organizations were breaking the law, then it's hard to say the IRS wasn't doing it's job by auditing them.
I agree for the most part, except for the fact that they weren't breaking the law!
From the following link, the IRS investigator Lerner had to say: "150 of the cases have been closed and no group had its tax-exempt status revoked..."
They "apologized". Well isn't that sweet?
This should most definitely be modded informative, not funny.
OK, big shot. Why don't you go ahead and tell me what rampant crime is running through our neighborhoods that isn't being reported on. Because I can tell you, with an extremely high level of confidence, that every single act of violence or criminality is taken by the media to be sensationalized and spun as a talking point for whatever agenda they are being paid to promote this week. Unless of course those acts of violence or criminality are being perpetuated by the people paying them the money, in which case yes, you won't hear a thing about it.
But the kinds of crimes that those people are perpetuating aren't the kind that make you batten down the hatches and dive under your bed. As a matter of fact, as far as real, violent crime is concerned, it's at it's lowest level in decades. But turn on the local ActionNews, and you'd think we're living in some post-apocalyptic Mad Max world, where just going outside is going to get you robbed and killed.
Funny, really. Because when I go outside, I still see the birds and the bees and the trees and things seem to be just like they've always been. It's all a matter of perspective.
Tactical teams, of course, would need to be used on any of the dangerous terrorist farmers that continue to produce the "poisonous" honey, and maybe they could even get Monsanto to engineer some bees to let loose near their farms so we can save the SWAT money and just sue them out of existence in court.
Yes, and we saw how well it worked for them.
It was actually a great idea. It wasn't executed very well, and people didn't realize, yet, why it should work that way. Nowadays, it makes a whole lot more sense.
Around Chicago it costs $1.00, and the air machines take credit cards. Wish I would have thought of that one...
Violate the constitution? Oh that's right, maybe you think there is an amendment there which will let you keep weapons just so you can revolt against the government if it upsets you - maybe calling in a fake fire and killing a few government employees that come to respond to it. Is that example enough to show how utterly stupid the misinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment as a self-destruct button is?
It shows how utterly stupid people like yourself are who don't understand the spirit of the 2nd Amendment. Regardless of whether or not you agree with it, the Bill of Rights guarantees the people the right to bear arms. If so many people think that this shouldn't be the case, then why not amend the Constitution to grant the government sole ownership of firearms? Why all this bickering back and forth, if you want the Constitution changed, change it. But passing laws that violate the supreme law of the land is not the answer.
Coming in here painting every gun owner as some loose-cannon nutter is as bad the people who think every 5-year old should have a pistol. You're both out of your goddamned minds. The 2nd Amendment is not there so people can have armed revolution against the government! It's there so the government doesn't do things to the people that would cause them to consider armed revolution. Do you see how that works? The citizenry being armed is what PREVENTS tyranny, not fixes it. It's like a flu shot, you don't take one after you have the flu.
Because there is no legislature anymore. There are groups of people who supposedly "vote" on "laws", which are really just controlled by their puppetmasters and media talking heads.
Combine that with the fact that the people in general trust their mother government to protect them, one-hundred percent, and anyone who would ever want to fight the government is an evil turrerist who should be disarmed anyway.
It's really a matter of perspective as there are three kinds of people, I've found. Those who distrust government (what used to be regular patriotic Americans, now terrorists), those who have not yet had the screws of the government turned on them (well-meaning idiots), and those who HAVE had the screws turned on them but don't mind since they enjoy being slaves (current patriotic Americans). It just so happens that most gun-owners fall under the first two categories, and those screaming for mommy to protect them because they watch too much network news and don't understand statistics fall under the last category, and are by far and away the largest group of people.
'One behavior that probably explains the excess lethality of violence and unintentional injuries in the United States is the widespread possession of firearms and the common practice of storing them (often unlocked) at home,' reads the report. 'The statistics are dramatic.'
I'm about done with Slashdot. This is actually passing as a legitimate story, even though it's obviously another thinly veiled hit piece on guns? Ever heard the saying "Don't feed the trolls?"